plan: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents proposal
Weight: 0.71
, amendment
Weight: 0.69
, concept
Weight: 0.65
, preparation
Weight: 0.60
Siblings blueprint
Weight: 0.77
, strategy
Weight: 0.65
, road map
Weight: 0.64
, mission
Weight: 0.63
, architect
Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality worth 0.85
is good job 0.77
has quality questions 0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.60
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(preparation, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(amendment, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(amendment, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(preparation, has quality questions)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(amendment, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(amendment, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(preparation, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(preparation, has quality questions)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(amendment, has quality bad)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(preparation, has quality good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(amendment, has quality good)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(preparation, has quality questions)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(blueprint, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(strategy, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(architect, is good job)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(preparation, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(amendment, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(amendment, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(preparation, has quality questions)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(strategy, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(strategy, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(blueprint, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(blueprint, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(architect, is good job)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(architect, is good job)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(plan, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality questions)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality bad)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(strategy, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(blueprint, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(architect, is good job)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(plan, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality questions)